Abortions.

^what is their ego to big or something?

savedbymcr_2004:

^what is their ego to big or something?

They always cite the bible... which they contort to their beliefs. It's sickening how they use propaganda.
Nothing is wrong with religion and being religious, it's just when you force your beliefs on people. It is especially wrong when you do it in the government. Church must be separate from state.

that is sickening, but if the bible isn't right then why do they base it on that?

savedbymcr_2004:

that is sickening, but if the bible isn't right then why do they base it on that?

The Bible just isn't the right way to back up your beliefs in the government.
It is their only reason to ban abortion, or gay rights, which is a totally different topic.
They even did it with segregation in the 60's!

^how con they use the bible to say that its right to treat colored people like shit?

savedbymcr_2004:

^how con they use the bible to say that its right to treat colored people like shit?

I don't know... something about the cattle in a bible verse. Plain wrong.

xsilverbulletx:

abortion kills. theres simply no other way to put it. i dont understand if the baby wont be treated correctly then you put it up for adoption. i dont see whats so hard to beleive about that.

The thing is, a lot of unfit parents simply wouldn't put their child up for adoption. Reasons for this vary from being too prideful to admit they aren't capable of raising a child, to using the child to get wellfare payments to fund their own spending habits (whether it be drugs, alcohol, or just spending the money on themselves while the child goes without), to being mentally incapacitated or otherwise just thinking that the amount of paperwork and legality that goes along with adoption is just too much hassle for an exhausted woman who's just given birth - so they don't bother and take the baby home with them.
Besides, if adoption was so successful, why are orphanages being overrun with unwanted children? Orphanages and foster care homes are not suitable places for children - abuse, molestation, deprivation of basic human rights - all of these things can and do occur in homes. Yes, they may also have occurred if the child had stayed with their natural parents, so surely it would have been better for all concerned if the mother had aborted the fetus before it knew any better? I believe in quality of life over quantity - just as I wouldn't want to be kept on life-support if I were a vegetable, I wouldn't want to be born if my life was going to be as horrible as what some kids go through. I'd much rather have been aborted if my parents couldn't or wouldn't raise me properly.

xsilverbulletx:

i know and we all know that 1 and 3 parents in this country aren't that poor. i used to live and detriot and despite all their finacial struggles of my neighbors they all had the money to have children.

Financial instability is not the only reason women choose not to continue with theie pregnancy. Yes, it can be a factor in a lot of abortion cases, but it is not and never will be the only one. There are not only many cases where carrying the fetus to full-term is either impossible because of a medical condition of either mother or child, but also cases where being pregnant in itself impacts on the wellbeing of the mother - I myself got fired when my employer found out I was expecting. What about the women who have children, but can't afford to stretch their income to accommodate another child - their best option is to abort, because how are they going to explain to their other children why they went to the hospital to give birth, and came home without a baby? These women can't give up their babies for adoption, even if they wanted to.
Then there are the women who are drug addicts, alcoholics, mentally ill, etc etc - they may be financially capable of raising a child, but physically and mentally they are nothing of the sort. And the child of a person with a drug dependency, if it makes it to full term, is likely to either die from withdrawals soon after birth, or be disabled in some way due to the toxins they received in the womb - nobody wants to adopt a deformed or disabled child, and a junkie is in no way a suitable parent. These fetuses are much better off being aborted before they have a chance to know any better.

xsilverbulletx:

theres no moral in killing human. when people say you can then your being selfish. most of you dont understand we were all fetus' once too. we could have been aborted but for the right reasons our parents did not. theres always adoption, and theres no need to kill the innocent.

Abortion is not 'killing a human'. 'Killing a human' is killing a baby that's already been born - fetuses are aborted long before they are able to survive outside the womb, and they have nothing that defines them as human - they're simply a parasitic clump of cells with no functioning nervous system, no human features, they don't see, think, feel, hear, breathe or do anything that would classify them as human. If given the opportunity to develop, miscarriage etc aside, they may one day be born as a human baby. But until that day, they are not human at all, and therefore abortion is not murder or 'killing innocent babies'. Yes, our parents could have aborted us, and they had every right to if that's what they felt was necessary - I wouldn't have known any better, you wouldn't have known any better, therefore neither of us would have cared - we would never have existed. And you can't miss something that was never here to begin with.
You say that choosing to have an abortion is selfish. I say that making a half-assed attempt to raise a child when you know full well you can't do it is selfish. I say that giving an innocent baby up for adoption, where it's more than likely going to spend its childhood being miserable, and in adulthood have to turn to crime, prostitution or drug abuse simply to survive is selfish - the child would have been much better off not ever being alive.

xsilverbulletx:

i do repect that a women has a right to choose but its at the point where abortion is becoming an icon of our society. its being used by people who really dont need abortions. im fine with abortions through rape. thats reasonable cause. but to go out have sex have an abortion and repeat the process might seem like thats emphasized too much, but thats the reality of what is happening today.

For one, the idea of women purposely having unprotected sex and then having an abortion to fix the problem, and doing that on a regular basis, is an extremely misguided one, and while there may be a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of women who do conduct themselves in that manner, the vast majority of women who get abortions are doing it for the right reasons, after taking the right precautions, and having them fail. This image of a woman who has an abortion every time she has sex (always unprotected, of course) is simply propaganda used by pro-life campaigners to try and attack the character of women who do choose not to go through with their pregnancies. It's not true, and I'm tired of hearing it.
Abortion is very, very rarely, if ever, used for the 'wrong' reasons. 'Right' and 'wrong' reasons all come down to the individual, and a reason that makes perfect sense to one person may seem really wrong to another person. But in the end, if a woman chooses to terminate her pregnancy, you can rest assured that she has tossed and turned and thought out all other avenues, before deciding that she is doing what is best for her and for the child - regardless of what your opinion is. If her reason is valid to her, then it should be valid to everyone else - it's not their body, it's hers, and if you can't trust her to make her own decisions, how can you trust her to raise a child?
In addition to that, only giving one or two 'valid reasons' for abortion doesn't wash. For instance, is aborting an ectopic pregnancy (where the fetus is growing outside the womb and will not only die before it reaches full-term, but likely kill the mother when it ruptures) still 'murder'? How are clinics expected to enforce it if it was decided that only rape victims could get an abortion? Anybody with half a brain could walk in, say they were raped by their neighbour and get an abortion. And what about the poor women who genuinely have been raped, but nobody believes them because everybody else claims they were raped? I think it's hypocritical to say, 'Abortion is murder, but if a woman was raped then it's okay.' That, to me, says that you are the type of person that... screw it, it's just outright being a hypocrite and I don't like it. You're either for it or against it - there can be no in-betweens.
To me, if you're against abortion, and believe it's murder, then women who might be killed by going through with their pregnancy must do so, and risk dying of severe hemorrhaging. Women who are raped must go through with their pregnancy, lose their job, get evicted for not being able to afford to pay rent, and just suck it up because 'it's not the baby's fault'. Women who find out the baby they're carrying will be severely deformed/disabled must have the child and either keep it, or just hope that some poor sap adopts it and gives it the care they couldn't (and I know I could never care for a retarded or disabled child - it's too much for someone like me to handle). Women who have children already and know that if they had another child, they'd all end up on the streets or in a shelter because of poverty, have to go through with their pregnancy, then come home and explain to their children, their friends and their family why there's no new baby to welcome into the fold.

That's why I'm all for abortion - these women, however much you disapprove of them for doing so, are making the right decision for their circumstances. They know better than you do, and you're either for it or against it. Don't be contradictory - if rape is a good enough excuse, then so is any other 'excuse' a woman presents.

Well, for the most part. I don’t feel that some pro-choice people actually realize that the unborn baby doesn’t get a choice. Yes, maybe it cannot make choices yet, but I could imagine that it would like a chance. I don’t mean to sound all spiritual, but life is a gift. Who knows? Even if the baby does grow up in a bad environment that doesn’t mean it’s doomed from its first breath. I believe it’s better than nothing.

As for cases of rape and incest, I don’t mean to sound harsh, but are you really going to punish the baby for the father’s crimes? I understand these are absolutely horrible situations, but I don’t understand how having an abortion is going to help that problem. And I’m going to try not to go into too much detail as it may just sound depressing and hopeless.

As for cases such as damage to the baby or it’s mother, I believe that if you can be 100% sure that a baby is going to die, or that the mother is than maybe we should find an early, cut-off period for these certain cases. I haven’t researched that much, so I don’t have a suggestion for that date, but I do believe it should be before the baby can feel pain and way before it develops brain waves.

And I also think that it doesn’t even have to have anything to do with religion, it’s about life. The baby’s and the mother’s life. Well, basically it’s about everyone’s life, and how it is affected by abortion.

I, mostly, think it’s a very delicate situation that should at least somewhat be brought under control. I know I should learn more about the details before I go off blasting my opinions, but i didn’t. So this is what I came up with from what I know.

And also, if someone else before me has expressed the same ideas, I’m also sorry. That is on account of my laziness towards reading this whole thread.

I was just logged onto MSN and they had an article on why some women choose abortion, why some choose adoption. The article that discusses why one women chose to have an abortion is here...

http://lifestyle.msn.com/mindbodyandsoul/womenintheworld/articlemc.aspx?cp-documentid=4595719>1=10114.

So what do you think? Do you think that she made the right or wrong decision? Why?

I personally believe that she made the right decision to have an abortion. There wasn't any guarantee that the fetus would make it to term and even if it did, there would be no possible way to fix the damage. Had she chose to keep the child, and had it survived, then it would have gone through numerous surgeries and there would be no telling how severely damaged brain function would be. There was no way that this child would have ever lived a normal life.

Perfectly Demented:

Well, for the most part. I don’t feel that some pro-choice people actually realize that the unborn baby doesn’t get a choice. Yes, maybe it cannot make choices yet, but I could imagine that it would like a chance. I don’t mean to sound all spiritual, but life is a gift. Who knows? Even if the baby does grow up in a bad environment that doesn’t mean it’s doomed from its first breath. I believe it’s better than nothing.

I just don't see why or how a clump of cells 'deserves' or 'would like' a choice, while the mother doesn't. Sounds pretty damn stupid to me - does my pancreas have more 'right to make choices' than I do? Hell no - I can always go get a new pancreas. Just as a woman who terminates her pregnancy, for whatever reason, can always go have another one when she is ready/with the right person. Why in hell should something that essentially doesn't exist yet, have more choices, more right to live, more right to make decisions, than I do as a living, breathing human being who's already existed for 21 years?
Yeah, a child born into a bad environment may not be doomed forever, but I happen to believe children should only be brought into environments that are caring, loving, safe, supportive, and suitable for a child - if they're going to go through certain hardships, I feel it's better for them to never exist. The world is overpopulated anyway, so what could it hurt to get rid of the ones who are going to be disadvantaged?

Perfectly Demented:

As for cases of rape and incest, I don’t mean to sound harsh, but are you really going to punish the baby for the father’s crimes? I understand these are absolutely horrible situations, but I don’t understand how having an abortion is going to help that problem. And I’m going to try not to go into too much detail as it may just sound depressing and hopeless.

Aborting the product of rape or incest is not 'punishing a baby'. It is not punishing anybody, certainly not a baby. A baby is what is born after roughly 40 weeks in the womb - a living, breathing, feeling, thinking creature. An embryo is a cancerous lump of cells. And again, why in hell should the INNOCENT MOTHER (because if she was raped, then she is just as innocent and undeserving of such torture as the 'baby' is) be put through the torture of having to look at her (possibly disabled, if the product of incest) baby and see the face of her rapist, or be reminded of that terrible time in her life? Having an abortion 'helps' that problem by ensuring that the innocent mother can move on with her life and try to forget about being violated in such a horrific way. Yeah, fair enough 'it wasn't the 'baby's' fault', but it wasn't the innocent mother's either and she shouldn't be punished by having to raise a child she never wanted, that only brings feelings of pain and shame when she thinks of or looks at it.

Perfectly Demented:

As for cases such as damage to the baby or it’s mother, I believe that if you can be 100% sure that a baby is going to die, or that the mother is than maybe we should find an early, cut-off period for these certain cases. I haven’t researched that much, so I don’t have a suggestion for that date, but I do believe it should be before the baby can feel pain and way before it develops brain waves.

How much do you know about abortion? If you knew pretty much anything about it, you'd know that there already ARE cut-off dates in a pregnancy, after which a mother has no choice but to go through with the pregnancy. In the case of severe deformities/disabilities that aren't diagnosed before such cut-off dates, or babies who die in the womb, there are exceptional cases where the doctor will induce the labour and deliver a stillborn fetus.
In the case of otherwise routine pregnancies that are simply unwanted, the cut-off period is indeed before a fetus is believed to have the ability to feel pain - brain waves don't necessarily indicate thought process or the ability to feel. In fetuses, brain waves are present from an early age to regulate heartbeat - it doesn't do anything but make sure the heart doesn't stop beating or go so fast it explodes.
As far as I know, the cut-off period for abortion is in the first trimester or early in the second trimester (12 - 16 weeks), and I can guarantee you there is absolutely no way that a 12 - 16-week-old fetus can hear, think, feel, see, breathe, or survive outside the womb. At that stage, it is still just a lump of cells that have no human features or thought process.

Perfectly Demented:

And I also think that it doesn’t even have to have anything to do with religion, it’s about life. The baby’s and the mother’s life. Well, basically it’s about everyone’s life, and how it is affected by abortion.

Explain to me how anybody else's life, bar the mother's, is affected by abortion? My friend had an abortion for medical reasons - it didn't impact on me, or her family, or anybody except her and the baby's father. They grieved, they moved on, and are now expecting a healthy baby early next year. But her abortion was nobody's business but hers and the baby's fathers, so I fail to see how abortion is 'basically about everyone's life, and how it is affected', because nobody else IS affected, unless they're busybodies who should find better things to do with their time than be judgmental of others.

Perfectly Demented:

I, mostly, think it’s a very delicate situation that should at least somewhat be brought under control. I know I should learn more about the details before I go off blasting my opinions, but i didn’t. So this is what I came up with from what I know.

As I pointed out before, abortion already IS under quite strict control - it's not running rampant. Nobody is aborting full-term fetuses. Nobody is 'killing' 'babies' that could survive outside the womb. Abortion has had a lot of research poured into it to make it as un-traumatic as possible for the mothers involved, and to ensure that pro-life protesters don't have a leg to stand on as far as 'killing babies' goes (which they don't - the cut-off period already ensures that the fetus is really just a nothing lump of cells, kind of like a gallstone - and nobody cares about people having gallstones removed, do they?).
As you said after this, you didn't bother to read the previous posts, so perhaps if you had you might have a slightly more informed opinion on abortion. The reason these threads are here is to help educate those who don't know much about a subject, rather than to spend 20 pages correcting ill-informed opinions and directing the less informed towards more information.

I don't know, that's one of my pet gripes about messageboards - I take the time to read each and every post, or at least the last five or ten pages of a discussion to make sure that my opinion hasn't already been said a thousand times, I just wonder why others can't show the same courtesy and at least read a few other posts to inform themselves.

if you look at it that way, then im still pro-life. i just cant imagine somebody taking anothers life. whos to decide who lives and dies? i beleive if abortion is illeagalized [clarifing what i said earlier] that women will pretend to be raped and all and thats true, but the good of illeagalizing abortions will overcome the bad. our society isn't mature enough to handle the option of abortion. and like i said earlier whos to say who should die and who should live, its kind of like playing god.

xsilverbulletx:

if you look at it that way, then im still pro-life. i just cant imagine somebody taking anothers life. whos to decide who lives and dies? i beleive if abortion is illeagalized [clarifing what i said earlier] that women will pretend to be raped and all and thats true, but the good of illeagalizing abortions will overcome the bad. our society isn't mature enough to handle the option of abortion. and like i said earlier whos to say who should die and who should live, its kind of like playing god.

But abortion isn't 'taking another's life' at all! Seriously. Does anybody actually read these posts?

druscilla; in rags:

Murder: Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

Abortion: The removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy.

In addition to that, if abortion were illegalised, there would simply be no clinics at all - they can't say 'Okay, we're gonna make it now so that only rape victims can get abortions'. Illegal means illegal for everyone, just like it's not okay for certain people to possess cocaine while others go to jail for it. If abortion was illegalised, women would still seek them - it's just that instead of going to a safe, clean, clinic with medical professionals who are qualified and trained to deal with complications that may arise from the surgery, women will be forced to revert to the 'good old days' of scalding hot baths with an entire bottle of gin, or going to a backyard abortionist who stabs them with a coathanger or knitting kneedle, risking hemorrhage, infection, sterilisation, and death.
Essentially, who are you to decide what society is 'mature enough to handle'? How is society not mature enough to handle abortion? Like I said (if you bothered to read it), only a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of women use abortion as a contraceptive method, if any at all do (I highly doubt anybody does, seeing as counselling is mandatory before and after the operation, and medical records would soon expose women who are using it irresponsibly and they would be referred to a therapist) - the rest of society is definitely mature enough to make their own decisions and do the right thing.
It's like drink-driving - it's been made illegal, but people still do it. Maybe not the majority of people, but people still do. Does that mean alcohol or driver's licences should be outlawed to stop those few people from being irresponsible? No.
I believe the same should be said of abortion - I have the right to do what the hell I want with my body - 'play God', if you will - because I know what is best for me.
'The good of illegalising it will overcome the bad'?
How, pray tell, do you rationalise that little statement? If abortion was illegalised, as I said, women will still go to drastic measures, possibly killing themselves in the process, to terminate their pregnancies. More children will be born into unsuitable environments. More children will run away from home (whether it be with their parents or their foster carers/orphanage) and turn to crime to survive. More women will die due to complications with their pregnancies. More families will end up on the streets or in chelters because they have too many mouths to feed and can't pay the rent. More newborn infants will be dumped in rubbish bins or strangled with their umbilical cord moments after their birth, and dumped. More deformed and disabled babies will be born after being maimed in the womb by a knitting kneedle, or suffering things like fetal alcohol syndrome after the mother attempted to miscarry by drinking excessively.
How can you possibly think that ANY of these circumstances are good, or could outweigh the minimal 'bad' things that abortion brigns with it. And, while I'm at it, what are the 'bad' things that come with abortion? Women who maintain their preferred lifestyle? Children who aren't born into poverty? Women who survive an ectopic pregnancy or other severe medical condition who go on to have successful pregnancies later on if that's what they desire? Rape victims who don't have to feel shame and intense pain every time they look at their swelling belly or baby?

T_T I Agree with Cigs up there. I don't think you are really reading if you are callinga fetus life

Did you know the reason they legalized abortion was because women were killing themselves trying to perform self abortions? thousands of deaths a year that way, and even when it's legal..it STILL goes on. Is it really worth the loss of real life?

after reading all this, i'm still stuck in the middle about the issue.

Perfectly Demented:

As for cases such as damage to the baby or it’s mother, I believe that if you can be 100% sure that a baby is going to die, or that the mother is than maybe we should find an early, cut-off period for these certain cases. I haven’t researched that much, so I don’t have a suggestion for that date, but I do believe it should be before the baby can feel pain and way before it develops brain waves.

And I also think that it doesn’t even have to have anything to do with religion, it’s about life. The baby’s and the mother’s life. Well, basically it’s about everyone’s life, and how it is affected by abortion.

What if it becomes fatal after the cut-off date? Then what can you do? Have the mother slowly die?

But, in the case of how it affects life, don't you think that the mothers' life is more important? I don't know how anybody could hold a dependent being above the independent being. The mother is the one who needs the consideration above an unborn. She is the one who has to bear the child, and face the reality that is being pregnant.. Having to give up school or work from bed rest, or any other occurance that comes with pregnancy. What if she needs that months paycheck or has to pay for school, but cannot attend it? If the mom has to carry the baby, then it should be her choice.

i believe that its thw woman's body, and her baby, the government has no rith to say what she can and cant do with it. if they legally ban abortion, its just one more way that they control us. the land of the free....isnt that we're aiming for?

so anyways, i also am ok with abortion because what if a woman gets raped? having that baby is a daily reminder of what happened to her and the child will get some of it jeans from the rapist/father,if its a boy, whoes to say that he wont grow up to do the same?

xsilverbulletx:

if you look at it that way, then im still pro-life. i just cant imagine somebody taking anothers life. whos to decide who lives and dies? i beleive if abortion is illeagalized [clarifing what i said earlier] that women will pretend to be raped and all and thats true, but the good of illeagalizing abortions will overcome the bad. our society isn't mature enough to handle the option of abortion. and like i said earlier whos to say who should die and who should live, its kind of like playing god.

Society isn't mature enough for abortion, but a bunch of unprepared, unstable mothers are mature enough to take care of human life? That doesn't sound quite right to me.
And besides, as has been pointed out a thousand times on this thread, before the point everyone here is talking about, before the second trimester, the "life" is an embryo - not a baby, not human. Terminating a pregnancy at that point is more comparable to removing a tumor than to taking a life.

I found this myspace bulletin:

"Body: This is not just a normal bulletin. This is a large problem in the United States, and we need it to stop! Many teens and young adults get abortions. Over 1,000,000 abortions are done in the US alone, each year. To reduce this risk, put into consideration of babies and give them a chance. They want to live! Not be murdered! Every child was put here for a reason, don't stop their chances of being something big!! :-[





This is inside of the placentatuses into real humans. They're not. I mean seriously, it's a tumor inside your body












"I could've been a future president!!!"




"Mommy, didn't you love me?"





ABORTION IS WRONG!
STOP KILLING BABIES!


"Was I really a mistake?"




"I'm sorry you didnt love me enough to give me a chance!"






"I could've been a doctor and found a cure for cancer!"

Please repost this!
Hit "Reply" copy the code and repaste in bulletin.

IF U CAN'T TAKE CARE OF A CHILD DON'T HAVE SEX AT ALL.

If you don't repost this, you don't have a HEART

If you don't repost this, you don't have a HEART"

Now pro-life kids are posting these bulletins on myspace, probably to make other kids pro-life. They're also probably the same kids who try to conform kids into Christianity over myspace. :/

I'm 100% pro-choice,and it really makes me upset when pro-lifers try to make fetuses into real humans. They're not. It's a tumor inside your body. If you want to keep it, then fine, I don't care, but stop trying to make myspace into a missionary ground.

^ At least you have the smarts to realise that bulletins like that are simply propaganda, attempting to guilt people into accepting pro-lifers' ridiculous stance on the subject.
As you said, fetuses are not human, they're not alive, and they're not babies.
They're terminated long before they become anything of that nature.

And, as Fezzik put it so well - if you can't trust women to make their own decision regarding abortion (or consider us too immature to 'handle' abortion), then how in hell can we be trusted to raise children?

'If you can't take care of a child, don't have sex'?
Oh, okay. Now YOU try explaining that one to my husband. Seriously. We're not millionaires, nor are we part of a church community who could band together and raise the money and organise donations so we could raise fifteen children. You expect that statement to wash with me, as a person in a stable relationship, but without a huge bank balance??
Pffffft. If you don't know what you're talking about, shut your freaking mouth. It only makes you look like a godforsaken FOOL.

In addition to that, with reagrds to 'I could have been a future president' or 'I could have been a doctor and found a cure for cancer', well, I wonder if these pro-lifers also consider the fact that, if these fetuses had the potential to grow up to become someone great, they could also have grown up to become the next Hitler, or a mass murderer, or a child molester... It works both ways.

Cigarettes And Suicide:

^ At least you have the smarts to realise that bulletins like that are simply propaganda, attempting to guilt people into accepting pro-lifers' ridiculous stance on the subject.
As you said, fetuses are not human, they're not alive, and they're not babies.
They're terminated long before they become anything of that nature.

And, as Fezzik put it so well - if you can't trust women to make their own decision regarding abortion (or consider us too immature to 'handle' abortion), then how in hell can we be trusted to raise children?

'If you can't take care of a child, don't have sex'?
Oh, okay. Now YOU try explaining that one to my husband. Seriously. We're not millionaires, nor are we part of a church community who could band together and raise the money and organise donations so we could raise fifteen children. You expect that statement to wash with me, as a person in a stable relationship, but without a huge bank balance??
Pffffft. If you don't know what you're talking about, shut your freaking mouth. It only makes you look like a godforsaken FOOL.

In addition to that, with reagrds to 'I could have been a future president' or 'I could have been a doctor and found a cure for cancer', well, I wonder if these pro-lifers also consider the fact that, if these fetuses had the potential to grow up to become someone great, they could also have grown up to become the next Hitler, or a mass murderer, or a child molester... It works both ways.

I didn't post that bulletin. I was just posting it for the sake of trying to start a discussion.